The vaccines | vaxxed boosted unvaxxed? New poll

How's your immunity looking? Had covid - vote twice - vax status and then again for infection status

  • Vaxxed but no booster

  • Boostered

  • Still waiting in queue for first vaccine dose

  • Won't get vaxxed (unless I have to for travel/work etc)

  • Past infection with covid + I've been vaccinated

  • Past infection with covid - I've not been vaccinated


Results are only viewable after voting.

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Any breakdown on how many of those were Pfizer/Moderna an how many were AZ?
I think it's been mostly Pfizer so far. It's one of the reasons why things like coverage of smaller nursing homes and elderly housebound people had been slow in some areas. The Pfizer logistics just didn't fit that kind of door to door service.

The AZ is arriving at closer to its scheduled volume now, which may be why a bunch of pharmacy staffed vaccine stations have opened this week. AZ will rapidly overtake Pfizer volumes if supplies stay on plan.

Just for the detail oriented...

I did a quick look back at what AZ were scheduling for the UK, and some of what happened. The details are all supposed to be confidential though - for commercial and security reasons (aka not annoying the neighbours). So some of this comes from things like House of Commons select committees, some from leaks to The Times etc. So it's all a bit vague, and in a thing where days matter, these may be a bit wobbly.

AZ planned to produce 30m doses (bulk product) in the UK by the end of September, they actually produced 19m by early January. Only 3.5m of those were finished to the point where they were ready for batch testing by the regulators. That process normally takes about 3 weeks (for biological reasons - they're making sure the mix is sterile) but apparently is now down to 5 days because the regulators are collecting samples (vials) in parallel with AZ rather than afterwards.

Messy business talking about vaccine supply timelines. As AZ and the EU doubtless know - though they can be talked about in press releases in different ways.
 
Last edited:

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
An interesting report from the NYTimes basically arguing that public discussion of the various vaccine trials has been unnecessarily negative. In particular that the lower efficacy numbers (on the AZ and around mutations in particular) are misleading people into thinking they aren't as important/useful as they really are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/briefing/vaccination-myanmar-coup-rochester-police.html
Here’s the key fact: All five vaccines with public results have eliminated Covid-19 deaths. They have also drastically reduced hospitalizations. “They’re all good trial results,” Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “It’s great news.”

Which if it proves to be even close to true in real life, will be a huge deal. Around 75,000 people were vaccinated in those trials.
 

lynchie

Full Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2006
Messages
7,065
An interesting report from the NYTimes basically arguing that public discussion of the various vaccine trials has been unnecessarily negative. In particular that the lower efficacy numbers (on the AZ and around mutations in particular) are misleading people into thinking they aren't as important/useful as they really are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/briefing/vaccination-myanmar-coup-rochester-police.html
Here’s the key fact: All five vaccines with public results have eliminated Covid-19 deaths. They have also drastically reduced hospitalizations. “They’re all good trial results,” Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “It’s great news.”

Which if it proves to be even close to true in real life, will be a huge deal. Around 75,000 people were vaccinated in those trials.
This is very true. AZ is sometimes talked about as some shambled together bodge of a vaccine, partly because their reporting has been pretty shambolic at times, but also because of that 65%(ish) effectiveness number looks pretty poor compared to Pfizer/Moderna. But no one in the vaccine arm needed hospitalisation, and if that holds when it gets rolled out, that's a huge success, even if a minority do get mild symptoms.

J&J seem to have gone a bit further with that. Their effectiveness number specifically excludes mild cases, and they've been heavily talking up that it reduces severe cases and hospitalisation. And I think that's fair enough. Even allowing for us being unsure about long-term impacts of those mild cases, keeping people out of hospital should be the main goal.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
This is very true. AZ is sometimes talked about as some shambled together bodge of a vaccine, partly because their reporting has been pretty shambolic at times, but also because of that 65%(ish) effectiveness number looks pretty poor compared to Pfizer/Moderna. But no one in the vaccine arm needed hospitalisation, and if that holds when it gets rolled out, that's a huge success, even if a minority do get mild symptoms.

J&J seem to have gone a bit further with that. Their effectiveness number specifically excludes mild cases, and they've been heavily talking up that it reduces severe cases and hospitalisation. And I think that's fair enough. Even allowing for us being unsure about long-term impacts of those mild cases, keeping people out of hospital should be the main goal.
It’s interesting that J&J have a different end-point to everyone else. I’d love to know why. Usually the primary end-point is discussed/agreed with the regulators so it’s a little odd that symptomatic covid has been used as the primary end-point for all bar one vaccine thus far.

Re hospitalisations etc we’ll be waiting a while to have any confidence over those data. The preliminary data so far will have been analysed/submitted based around statistical significance for the primary end-point. Because that’s what they need for a license. We’ll learn more and more about how well vaccines affect the severity of disease (and transmission) in the weeks/months ahead. You’re right, though, the initial trends are very encouraging and it’s arguably more important to know how effective a vaccine is at keeping people out of hospital than its affect on absolute number of cases.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
This bit of the article that @jojojo linked makes delightful reading.

Of the roughly 75,000 people who have receivedone of the five in a research trial, not a single person has died from Covid, and only a few people appear to have been hospitalized. None have remained hospitalized 28 days after receiving a shot.

To put that in perspective, it helps to think about what Covid has done so far to a representative group of 75,000 American adults: It has killed roughly 150 of them and sent several hundred more to the hospital. The vaccines reduce those numbers to zero and nearly zero, based on the research trials.

Zero isn’t even the most relevant benchmark. A typical U.S. flu season kills between five and 15 out of every 75,000 adults and hospitalizes more than 100 of them.
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,209
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
This bit of the article that @jojojo linked makes delightful reading.
I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.
Yeah that’s a very good point. Plus the trial is unlikely to recruit the very old or very unwell, who will disproportionately feature in those dead/hospitalised stats.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
I don't doubt the gist of that, and agree it's extremely good news, but I can't help thinking that the 75,000 trial volunteers will mostly be people who follow distancing and hygiene rules closely, whereas of the 75,000 representative Americans at least half will be deluded loons.
It's true that they aren't quite a cross-section of the population. Their own placebo groups over the efficacy trial reporting period have somewhere between 6 and 10 deaths in total and around 100 hospitalisations. Those numbers are harder to confirm though as hospitalisation criteria (and even the definition of a hospital) will vary between countries.

The trials are still ongoing, so we will gradually see more data on this. How much more data is a tricky question to answer. Trial participants are leaving trials when they get offered approved vaccines (which will make US/UK trials even more unrepresentative soon). People involved in trials of approved vaccines like Moderna and Pfizer are being given the real thing in place of the placebo. The trial I'm on is currently reviewing how to treat its guinea pigs - and it now looks as if they're going to turn it into a crossover trial - everyone gets two more jabs, placebo if you had the vaccine, vaccine if you had the placebo. I'm not sure how much extra data they get from that, but I guess they have their reasons.

Soon the only real data (which is incidentally the most important data) will be what happens to the millions who are being vaccinated.
 

Pexbo

Winner of the 'I'm not reading that' medal.
Joined
Jun 2, 2009
Messages
68,413
Location
Brizzle
Supports
Big Days

Small study but interesting findings. Prior infection plus single vaccine jab gives Ab titres > two jabs. Might be an easy way to make finite vaccine supplies go a lot further. Especially in countries with very high caseload to begin with (e.g. Uk)
Somewhat unrelated but isn’t it people who have had COVID and then a vaccine that have felt the worst side effects?
 

Wolverine

Full Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
2,448
Location
UK
Some more good news coming out of Israel with regards to a 2-dose en-masse Pfizer vaccination in terms of efficacy in preventing transmission and severe covid. Israel has vaccinated about 20% of its population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55706855
https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...KyQ5-7pg1uR2U3w2wxVSH9LYC9cFp_rIJ3euI4IYLM0pY

According to Maccabi, only 31 people out of 163,000 fully vaccinated customers became infected 7-16 days following their second shot. A control group of similar ages had over 6,500 infections in the same period. The two groups are not perfectly comparable – those who get vaccinated may be more concerned about COVID-19 and likely to take other precautions, for example. Nevertheless, it takes a lot to explain away a 200-fold difference in infection rates. Maccabi told the Times of Israel the vaccine was 92 percent effective, only slightly below the 95 percent reported in clinical trials. That's particularly impressive since the Maccabi sample was much older on average than Pfizer's test population.

The health ministry's sample is larger, and the results almost as good. Within a week of their second vaccination, 317 people out of 715,425 tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, a rate of 0.04 percent. It's harder for clinical trials to measure rare events like hospitalizations and deaths than infections, so it's particularly important that Israel reported just 16 hospital cases among the vaccinated, or 0.002 percent.

However, the Israeli data is less positive for the benefits of a single Pfizer/BioNtech dose, possibly explaining why Israel's national infection rate kept climbing even after a larger proportion received their first round. At the time of writing, there are 404 critically ill patients in Israeli hospitals who got their first vaccine dose prior to testing positive. This potentially conflicts with the clinical trial data, which showed infection rates flatlining even before the second round was administered.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Somewhat unrelated but isn’t it people who have had COVID and then a vaccine that have felt the worst side effects?
Probably not unrelated. It may be that it's telling us that prior infection is like having the first dose. In the mRNA trials a lot of the strongest side-effects have been on dose 2.

Some more good news coming out of Israel with regards to a 2-dose en-masse Pfizer vaccination in terms of efficacy in preventing transmission and severe covid. Israel has vaccinated about 20% of its population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55706855
https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...KyQ5-7pg1uR2U3w2wxVSH9LYC9cFp_rIJ3euI4IYLM0pY
I was just reading that. Really reassuring news.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Some more good news coming out of Israel with regards to a 2-dose en-masse Pfizer vaccination in terms of efficacy in preventing transmission and severe covid. Israel has vaccinated about 20% of its population
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55706855
https://www.iflscience.com/health-a...KyQ5-7pg1uR2U3w2wxVSH9LYC9cFp_rIJ3euI4IYLM0pY

More Israeli data. Over 60s who have been vaccinated showing significant reduction in cases/hospitalisations etc

The tweet is framed as nothing but good news but the 40-60 yo graph is less reassuring. That’s a big worry for me. Once the elderly are vaccinated is there a risk we let our guard down and kick off a surge of middle aged hospitalisation/deaths. I know that once my mum and dad are vaccinated I will feel like the pandemic threat is basically over. Would suck to end up in ITU a few weeks later.
 

Wibble

In Gadus Speramus
Staff
Joined
Jun 15, 2000
Messages
88,608
Location
Centreback

More Israeli data. Over 60s who have been vaccinated showing significant reduction in cases/hospitalisations etc

The tweet is framed as nothing but good news but the 40-60 yo graph is less reassuring. That’s a big worry for me. Once the elderly are vaccinated is there a risk we let our guard down and kick off a surge of middle aged hospitalisation/deaths. I know that once my mum and dad are vaccinated I will feel like the pandemic threat is basically over. Would suck to end up in ITU a few weeks later.
I won't relax until as close to 100% of people are vaccinated as possible. And even then it will take years to get the whole world immunised.

In Australia's case we will immunise everyone who wants it by October (#scottyfrommarketing promise so take with a pinch of salt) and them International.trabel may still be hugely impacted. Vaccination will be required to get in but with less than 100% effectiveness and inevitably the odd fraudulent vaccination certificate we will still be vulnerable.

I wish we were being harsher on those who will refuse the vaccine but it looks like we will be piss weak.
 

Wolverine

Full Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
2,448
Location
UK
The tweet is framed as nothing but good news but the 40-60 yo graph is less reassuring. That’s a big worry for me. Once the elderly are vaccinated is there a risk we let our guard down and kick off a surge of middle aged hospitalisation/deaths. I know that once my mum and dad are vaccinated I will feel like the pandemic threat is basically over. Would suck to end up in ITU a few weeks later.
Very true, I think ideally it'll be offset by more vaccines coming to market and logistics in place to get that age group vaccinated (although I'm not sure the urgency will be the same) but demand will be there.

In addition with community spread and R number lessening enough to withstand behaviour changes with relaxation of rules through a combination of some social rules prohibiting too much mixing too quickly and decreased transmissibility (both from those who've had one vaccine, those who have had covid recently, those who had covid but a one dose vaccine).

I suppose the questions then with regards to morals of the lockdown in terms of societal impact comes into play with the elderly, vulnerable protected. Risk also with propagation of the variants too and how much that will lessen the aggregate benefit of vaccines.

But I mean we were looking for proof of conception for vaccines lessing transmission and more and more data coming in to suggest that effect is a plus overall - for vaccine confidence and eventual uptake by general population.

Weirdly I do wonder how different I'll be socially once I've had my second Pfizer dose in March.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Very true, I think ideally it'll be offset by more vaccines coming to market and logistics in place to get that age group vaccinated (although I'm not sure the urgency will be the same) but demand will be there.

In addition with community spread and R number lessening enough to withstand behaviour changes with relaxation of rules through a combination of some social rules prohibiting too much mixing too quickly and decreased transmissibility (both from those who've had one vaccine, those who have had covid recently, those who had covid but a one dose vaccine).

I suppose the questions then with regards to morals of the lockdown in terms of societal impact comes into play with the elderly, vulnerable protected. Risk also with propagation of the variants too and how much that will lessen the aggregate benefit of vaccines.

But I mean we were looking for proof of conception for vaccines lessing transmission and more and more data coming in to suggest that effect is a plus overall - for vaccine confidence and eventual uptake by general population.

Weirdly I do wonder how different I'll be socially once I've had my second Pfizer dose in March.
The variants are really making me nervous. The next couple of months we’ll have millions of people partially protected by a single dose while there is ongoing rampant community spread, including variants which have already evolved to partially evade the existing immune response. That’s a slightly terrifying scenario. I think I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and try not to think about it. We’ll probably be fine. Hopefully :nervous:
 

Dumbstar

We got another woman hater here.
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
21,137
Location
Viva Karius!
Supports
Liverpool
The variants are really making me nervous. The next couple of months we’ll have millions of people partially protected by a single dose while there is ongoing rampant community spread, including variants which have already evolved to partially evade the existing immune response. That’s a slightly terrifying scenario. I think I’m going to stick my fingers in my ears and try not to think about it. We’ll probably be fine. Hopefully :nervous:
Won't everybody's bodies be ready for covid and it's evolving variants? At least those that were vaccinated or gained some immunity by already being infected once? Surely that's a better place to be than a year ago when we were all ripe for the picking with zero immunity programming?
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
Won't everybody's bodies be ready for covid and it's evolving variants? At least those that were vaccinated or gained some immunity by already being infected once? Surely that's a better place to be than a year ago when we were all ripe for the picking with zero immunity programming?
So far it looks as though the variants are at least partially vulnerable to immunity from prior infection or vaccination.

The nightmare scenario is some sort of extreme escape mutation where having caught covid before or received one of the vaccines gives you no protection at all. Then the virus can spread just as quickly as it did in the very first wave. Nobody will have any protection at all. It’s also possible that this could happen with a variant that is simultaneously more lethal.

Everything that I’ve read about coronaviruses tells me that this is extremely unlikely. They tend to be stable and don’t mutate rapidly or dramatically. Immunity isn’t necessarily very long lasting but second and subsequent infections tend to be less severe. It’s just that all these recent variants have freaked me out a bit so so it’s hard not to obsess about worst case scenarios.
 

Dumbstar

We got another woman hater here.
Joined
Jul 18, 2002
Messages
21,137
Location
Viva Karius!
Supports
Liverpool
So far it looks as though the variants are at least partially vulnerable to immunity from prior infection or vaccination.

The nightmare scenario is some sort of extreme escape mutation where having caught covid before or received one of the vaccines gives you no protection at all. Then the virus can spread just as quickly as it did in the very first wave. Nobody will have any protection at all. It’s also possible that this could happen with a variant that is simultaneously more lethal.

Everything that I’ve read about coronaviruses tells me that this is extremely unlikely. They tend to be stable and don’t mutate rapidly or dramatically. Immunity isn’t necessarily very long lasting but second and subsequent infections tend to be less severe. It’s just that all these recent variants have freaked me out a bit so so it’s hard not to obsess about worst case scenarios.
Agreed, I fully share the fears of worst case scenarios, sadly. But the hope has to come from SARS1, the common cold, etc, which have all mutated into less serious coronavirus variants. To kill more people in different variants is an evolutionary suicide mission. The hope again.
 

hmchan

Full Member
Joined
Nov 20, 2017
Messages
1,429
Location
Hong Kong
An interesting report from the NYTimes basically arguing that public discussion of the various vaccine trials has been unnecessarily negative. In particular that the lower efficacy numbers (on the AZ and around mutations in particular) are misleading people into thinking they aren't as important/useful as they really are.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/01/briefing/vaccination-myanmar-coup-rochester-police.html
Here’s the key fact: All five vaccines with public results have eliminated Covid-19 deaths. They have also drastically reduced hospitalizations. “They’re all good trial results,” Caitlin Rivers, an epidemiologist at Johns Hopkins University, told me. “It’s great news.”

Which if it proves to be even close to true in real life, will be a huge deal. Around 75,000 people were vaccinated in those trials.
Very true. The press has been too busy promoting the limitations found in the trials, without mentioning the positives. First we see people extensively question vaccines' effectiveness against new strains, then the side effects (which are ordinary), and now the efficacy. All these do no good to the society but mislead people not to take vaccines.
 

Brwned

Have you ever been in love before?
Joined
Apr 18, 2008
Messages
50,829
New data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirms what anecdotal reports from nursing home administrators around the country have been suggesting for weeks: that a significant number of their workers are refusing the Covid-19 vaccine, at least when they are initially offered it.

The C.D.C. reported Monday that among 11,460 nursing homes where pharmacists from CVS and Walgreens held vaccination clinics between mid-December and mid-January, 78 percent of residents got immunized on average, but only 37.5 percent of staff members did.
Any reports of similar happening in the UK? That’s a lot of people turning down the vaccine!
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Any reports of similar happening in the UK? That’s a lot of people turning down the vaccine!
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2021/feb/01/half-of-care-home-staff-at-uks-largest-provider

Some of it seems to be about logistics issues. Sometimes the staff on duty get vaccinated, but the others don't (and don't get paid time off to go to one of the vaccination centres). I've not seen any national figures but from the anecdotal stuff - it looks like maybe 20% actually don't want it, but there another big group who simply haven't had it.

I assume it's tied in with broader cultural/societal issues. That can be the full range of things from ethnicity, religion, through to simply being young. Vaccine hesitancy is a big issue, particularly in BAME and Eastern European communities. For the younger staff, I'm guessing the reasoning is the same as on here - "I won't get that ill, why should I risk side-effects from a vaccine. I'll watch for a couple of years."
 

711

Verified Bird Expert
Scout
Joined
Dec 10, 2007
Messages
24,209
Location
Don't sign old players and cast offs
It’s an interesting one. I’m sure one of our resident clinicians (@africanspur @Wolverine ) can correct me if my experiences is out of date but hep B vaccination used to be a requirement to work in hospitals. If your titre is down, get a booster. Non-negotiable. You wonder if this vaccine should also be a condition of employment?
My first reaction is that it very much should. But if that were the case then how about the likes of teachers, don't they have a duty of care to avoid infecting the children they teach and their families?
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
My first reaction is that it very much should. But if that were the case then how about the likes of teachers, don't they have a duty of care to avoid infecting the children they teach and their families?
Yeah, it’s hard to know where to draw the line. Waiters in restaurants, taxi drivers etc etc

I just remember the Hep B thing being something we all accepted. There was never any choice. Maybe it was more optional than it felt like at the time? It was back in the days when people were generally a lot less aware of their rights!
 

MikeUpNorth

Wobbles like a massive pair of tits
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
19,938
Just whack an NHS surcharge tax on anyone who chooses not to be vaccinated when offered. Like we put tax on tobacco products to try to offset the additional health costs.
 

redshaw

Full Member
Joined
Jul 17, 2015
Messages
9,586
Problem is the vaccines don't stop the spread as far as we know, they stop people ending up in hospital and dying. You will get sick and spread it still or be like asymptomatic spreaders at best.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
I think we're a long way from any kind of compulsion. We still don't know what happens in terms of spread from mild/asymptomatic cases. The antivax campaigners have damaged some people's confidence - rumours and half truths spread very fast. The focus has to be on education and rejecting misinformation.

Importantly though, there is a risk that we compound suspicion if we talk compulsion (history tells us this!) We also risk compounding health and workplace inequality. That's particularly the case for Black workers, but similar patterns of hesitancy are seen in some other minority groups.

The opinion/intention surveys suggest that the people who are most likely to accept the jab as soon as it's offered are white, British born, educated, living in postcodes with good economic profiles and low covid death rates. Building trust is too important to be left to workplace compulsion.

That said, I am a complete hypocrite on this. I would prefer to get on a plane that only vaccinated people can travel on, or in a pub where only vaccinated people can go. But that's my self preservation instincts talking, not my public health perspective.
 

africanspur

Full Member
Joined
Sep 1, 2010
Messages
9,082
Supports
Tottenham Hotspur
It’s an interesting one. I’m sure one of our resident clinicians (@africanspur @Wolverine ) can correct me if my experiences is out of date but hep B vaccination used to be a requirement to work in hospitals. If your titre is down, get a booster. Non-negotiable. You wonder if this vaccine should also be a condition of employment?
Yep it is and in fact, it, as well as evidence of other vaccines, is compulsory to even enter medical school. At least for doctors, I'm not sure about nurses/HCAs/physio etc

I would consider it quite irresponsible tbh to be around very elderly patients and be turning down the vaccine.

And contrary to what some people think, it isn't some horrific infringement of your personal liberty. As you said, it's already a requirement for some jobs to be vaccinated. It's a requirement for some countries to be vaccinated. It's part of various social contracts around the world, which we all sign up to to some extent.

Difficult conversation generally about compulsion though, especially at this particular stage.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Umm... does this mean a lot of us need to eat some humble pie? Sputnik seems to be extremely effective.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
It's great news. Again, as with other partial publications the devil may be in the details. But the concept of switching adenovirus between the two doses was always interesting. It's part of a trial with AZ I believe (for a dose of each approach) but I don't know what the status of that is, or whether it might be an option in some rollout programs in Q2.

Like the AZ it will have to answer questions on specifics like proportions of over 70s involved in the trials and when/where the trials ran - and hence which mutations it might have been up against.

But yeah, it can only be good news. Particularly if they can get to mass production fast enough and can sell it cheap enough to help the bigger campaigns.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee
Umm... does this mean a lot of us need to eat some humble pie? Sputnik seems to be extremely effective.


https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(21)00191-4/fulltext
I've got to say, I've just read and (more or less) understood the full report. It's a model of clarity, and left me with none of the "what are you trying to say,/hide, were your tests as confused as your writing?" reactions I had to the AZ paper.

Just to state the obvious now. It's based on their Russian trials - so they don't have any mutation efficacy info to give us, but it is does cover the age groups nicely (though not ethnicities - but we should get more on that from their other trials). It's very open about possible serious adverse events (comparable numbers/types across vaccinated/placebo groups) and deaths (which included two covid deaths in the vaccinated arm - both of whom became symptomatic within a week of dose 1).

Very encouraging. Though doubtless someone will spot more flaws, and as always the feeling that we won't really "know" until we get mass data remains.
 

Pogue Mahone

The caf's Camus.
Joined
Feb 22, 2006
Messages
133,351
Location
"like a man in silk pyjamas shooting pigeons
I've got to say, I've just read and (more or less) understood the full report. It's a model of clarity, and left me with none of the "what are you trying to say,/hide, were your tests as confused as your writing?" reactions I had to the AZ paper.

Just to state the obvious now. It's based on their Russian trials - so they don't have any mutation efficacy info to give us, but it is does cover the age groups nicely (though not ethnicities - but we should get more on that from their other trials). It's very open about possible serious adverse events (comparable numbers/types across vaccinated/placebo groups) and deaths (which included two covid deaths in the vaccinated arm - both of whom became symptomatic within a week of dose 1).

Very encouraging. Though doubtless someone will spot more flaws, and as always the feeling that we won't really "know" until we get mass data remains.
Where did you find the full report? I read the Lancet opinion piece but couldn’t access the report it referenced.
 

jojojo

JoJoJoJoJoJoJo
Staff
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
38,145
Location
Welcome to Manchester reception committee